Journal of Geosciences, 60 (2015), 23–29

DOI: 10.3190/jgeosci.186

Letter to editor

Sulfur-rich antimonselite, Sb2(Se,S)3 in the Se-bearing mineral
association from the Příbram uranium and base metal ore district,
Czech Republic
Pavel Škácha1, 2*, Jakub Plášil3, Jiří Sejkora4, Viktor Goliáš2
Mining Museum Příbram, Hynka Kličky Place 293, 261 01 Příbram VI – Březové Hory, Czech Republic; skacha-p@muzeum-pribram.cz
Institute of Geochemistry, Mineralogy and Mineral Resources, Faculty of Science, Charles University in Prague, Albertov 6, 128 43
Prague 2, Czech Republic
3
Institute of Physics ASCR, v.v.i., Na Slovance 2, 182 21 Prague 8, Czech Republic
4
Department of Mineralogy and Petrology, National Museum, Cirkusová 1740, 193 00 Prague 9-Horní Počernice, Czech Republic* Corresponding author
12Antimonselite from the new occurrence, Příbram uranium–base metal ore district (Central Bohemia, Czech Republic),
has been studied by means of electron microprobe and X-ray diffraction. Antimonselite crystals, reaching up to 1.5 mm
across, were rarely found in the calcite gangue with uraninite in association with clausthalite, tiemannite, hakite,tetrahedrite, Se-rich chalcopyrite, permingeatite, Se-rich and Se-analogue of chalcostibite and dzharkenite. Based onelectron-microprobe analyses, the empirical formula of the studied antimonselite (mean of 7 point analyses, recalculated
to 5 apfu) is (Sb2.06Cu0.01)Σ2.07(Se2.47S0.46)∑2.93. The studied S-rich antimonselite is orthorhombic, the space group Pnma,
with a = 11.7156(3), b = 3.9514(11), c = 11.5645(3) Å, V = 535.36(15) Å3, and Z = 4. The structure was refined fromthe single-crystal X-ray data to R1 = 0.0143 for 634 reflections [with Iobs > 3σ(I)]. The structure of S-rich antimonselite
is isotypic to that of stibnite. Sulfur was found to be entering the selenium sites regularly without any evidence of preferential ordering of the atoms at the different sites.
Keywords: antimonselite, Se-chalcostibite, crystal structure, X-ray diffraction, Příbram, Czech Republic
Received: 24 June 2014; accepted: 1 December 2014; handling editor: Roman Skála

1. Introduction

2. Occurrence and sample description

Antimonselite, ideally, Sb2Se 3, is a rare Se-analogue
of stibnite, Sb 2S3, which has been described only fromthe several localities in China up to date. The mineralis known from localities Laerma (Wen et al. 2006)
and Qiongmo (Liu et al. 1998), which are geneticallyrelated to Au–Se deposits. Other occurrences of antimonselite in the same country were found at uranium
deposits: Baimadong (Chen et al. 1993), Sanqilinyi
and Sanbaqi (Min and Wu 1992) and Bentou (Min etal. 1995).
Here, we describe the first occurrence of antimonselite in the Czech Republic. It was found in
the association of other selenides and sulfides in theuranium-bearing veins of the Příbram uranium–basemetal ore district (Růžička 1986). Two small fragments of calcite vein, containing the later analyzed
antimonselite, were collected by one of the authors(PS) at the dump of the former uranium mine No. 16(the Příbram–Háje deposit). In the current paper we
present the new crystal structure data for the sulfurrich variety of antimonselite.

The uranium and base-metal ore-district Příbram (Central
Bohemia, Czech Republic) is located at an exocontactof the Central Bohemian Plutonic Complex with the
Teplá–Barrandian Unit (Tvrdý 2003). Uranium mineralization occurs in a zone that is about 25 km long and
up to 2 km wide and is concentrated in several separated
ore deposits (Ettler et al. 2010). Selenium mineralization in the Příbram area was first mentioned by Růžička
(1986) and later was studied by Litochleb et al. (2004),
who described several selenide minerals from a historical
specimen found during 1950’s. Larger number of samples
containing selenide mineralization (e.g. clausthalite,
hakite, permingeatite, eskebornite) was recently foundin the dump material from the shafts no. 11A Bytíz andno. 16 Háje (Škácha and Sejkora 2007; Škácha et al.
2009, 2010, 2014). The origin of selenide mineralization
within the carbonate veins follows the crystallization of
uraninite, while the redox potential of hydrothermal fluids
is lowered and fugacity of Se increases (Dymkov 1985).
Recently studied specimens containing antimonselite
come from a dump material of the former uranium minewww.jgeosci.org

Pavel Škácha, Jakub Plášil, Jiří Sejkora, Viktor Goliáš

Fig. 1 Antimonselite crystals etched from calcite. Příbram, dump of the
shaft No. 16. Width of picture is 2.5 mm.

No. 16. This shaft is localized in the ore deposit Háje,
but it was also used as a central shaft for mining of othernearby deposits (Bytíz, Jerusalém). We suppose thatthe majority of Se-bearing material came from the ore
deposit Bytíz, which provided 52 % of the uranium netproduction of the whole Příbram uranium and base-metal
district. The shaft No. 16 opened mainly the middle andthe deeper parts of the vein system (from 500 m down
to the depth of 1800 m under the surface). The deposit
was discovered in 1947 and the underground mining of
uranium in the Příbram area proceeded from 1948 to1991 (Ettler et al. 2010).
Antimonselite was found in two samples of carbonate
vein containing uraninite with partially different association. On the first specimen (labelled “A”), hakite, Se-richtetrahedrite, Se-rich chalcostibite and chalcopyrite were
found in association with antimonselite. The second

specimen (“B”) contains antimonselite, hakite, tiemannite, permingeatite, clausthalite, Se-rich chalcostibite, an
unnamed Se-analogue of chalcostibite, dzharkenite andtetrahedrite.
Antimonselite forms in both samples silver needlelike crystals up to 1.5 mm in length and 0.1 mm in thickness, which occur in calcite gangue. They are visuallyindistinguishable from stibnite (Fig. 1). The crystals arevery brittle, showing a perfect cleavage along {010}and pyramidal termination. Antimonselite is one of theyoungest ore mineral phases occurring on both specimens (Fig. 2).
The oldest selenides in association are irregulargrains of clausthalite and tiemannite (up to 20–50 μm
in size) which are usually overgrown by younger aggregates of hakite, tetrahedrite and Se-rich chalcopyrite(aggregates up to 300 μm in size). The other determined selenides are already distinctly younger. Fromthe younger selenides occurs idiomorphic crystals ofdzharkenite up to 50–100 μm; Se-rich chalcostibite as
dark silver, very brittle, imperfectly lenticular crystals
covering an area of up to 5 mm2; aggregates of permingeatite and an unnamed Se-analogue of chalcostibitewith grains up to 20 μm in size.

3. Chemical composition

3.1.	Experimental
Quantitative chemical data for the studied samples wereobtained by electron microprobe CAMECA SX100(Laboratory of Electron Microscopy and Microanalysis of
Masaryk University and Czech Geological Survey, Brno)in the wavelength-dispersive mode with an accelerating
voltage of 25 kV, a specimen current of 10 nA, and abeam diameter of about 1–2 µm. The following standards
and X-ray lines were used: Cu (CuKα), Ag (AgLα), Au(AuMα), PbSe (SeLβ), HgTe (HgMα), FeS2 (SKα, FeKα),
CdTe (CdLβ), PbS (PbMα), Sb (SbLβ), pararammelsbergite(AsLβ), ZnS (ZnKα), Bi2Te3 (TeLβ), Tl(BrI) (TlLα) and Bi(BiMβ). Peak counting times were 20 s for all elements,and one half of the peak time for each background. Raw
intensities were converted to concentrations using automatic PAP (Pouchou and Pichoir 1985) matrix-correction
software.

3.2.	Results
Fig. 2 Back-Scattered Electron image of polished section (specimen A)
containing antimonselite (A) in form of light needles and their sections.
Dark grains growing in carbonate (C) and darker part of compact ore
matrix comprises of chalcopyrite (Cpu) with variable Se content. White
globular aggregates in ore matrix are uraninite (U) and light grains inore matrix are tetrahedrite (T).

24

The results of the electron-probe microanalyses of antimonselite are given in Tab. 1. Antimonselite of the bothtypes shows rather homogeneous composition, characterized by the sulfur contents of up to 0.559 apfu (Tab. 1).
Along with S, only minor contents of Cu up to 0.019

Sulfur-rich antimonselite from Příbram

Tab. 1 Chemical composition of antimonselite from Příbram
mean*

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Cu

0.09

0.04

0.05

0.07

0.00

0.07

0.26

0.17

Sb

53.83 53.45 52.77 53.94 53.84 54.26 54.12 54.40

Se41.88 43.56 43.57 41.65 41.62 40.86 40.99 40.92

S

3.16

Total

98.97 99.07 98.46 98.89 98.95 98.80 99.21 99.39

2.02

2.07

3.23

3.48

3.61

3.84

3.90

Cu

0.007 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.000 0.005 0.019 0.012

Sb

2.061 2.082 2.063 2.066 2.051 2.069 2.044 2.051

Cu+Sb 2.068 2.085 2.067 2.071 2.051 2.074 2.063 2.063
Se

2.472 2.616 2.626 2.459 2.445 2.403 2.387 2.379

S

0.460 0.298 0.307 0.470 0.504 0.523 0.551 0.559

Se+S

2.932 2.915 2.933 2.929 2.949 2.926 2.937 2.937* mean of 7 point analyses; calculation on the basis of 5 apfuapfu) were found. The empirical formula of the studied
antimonselite (mean of 7 point analyses, based on 5 apfu)
is (Sb2.06Cu0.01)Σ2.07(Se2.47S0.46)∑2.93.
Among the other determined minerals, tiemannite (Se+ Hg + Cu + Cd + Zn + As + Ag + Tl = 2 apfu) is a S-freephase with minor contents of Cd (up to 0.03 apfu) andCu (up to 0.05 apfu). Clausthalite (Pb + Se + S + Sb +Tl + Bi = 2 apfu) is close to end-member with only 0.07
apfu S and 0.04 apfu Sb. Hakite (Se + Cu + Sb + Hg + S+ Zn + Ag + As + Cd = 29 apfu) is a Hg-rich phase withvarious contents of S (0.21–4.43 apfu). Tetrahedrite (Se+ Cu + Sb + Hg + S + Zn + Ag + As + Cd = 29 apfu) has
a variable composition; both Fe- and Zn-rich members
were found. Selenium content in tetrahedrite varies from0.01 to 5.83 apfu. Chalcopyrite (S + Cu + Fe + Se + Te +As + Ag = 4 apfu) is Se-rich (0.18–0.69 apfu). Permingeatite (Cu + Sb + Se + Fe = 8 apfu) is close to the ideal
formula, only with 0.28–0.33 apfu S. Se-rich chalcostibite(S + Cu + Sb + Se + Ag + Fe + As + Hg = 4 apfu) has
0.36–0.72 apfu of Se, and As contents up to 0.06 apfu.
Unnamed Se-analogue of chalcostibite (S + Cu + Sb +Se + Ag + Fe + As + Hg = apfu) is close to end-member
CuSbSe2 with only 0.09–0.35 apfu S and up to 0.05 apfu
As. Dzharkenite (Se + Fe + S + Cu + Ag + Hg = 3 apfu)
is close to the ideal formula FeSe2 with Cu up to 0.02
apfu and S in the range of 0.04–0.11 apfu.

4. Powder X-ray diffraction

4.1.	Experimental
The X-ray powder diffraction pattern of antimonselite
was obtained from hand-picked samples by a Bruker
D8 Advance diffractometer (National Museum, Prague)
with a solid-state 1D LynxEye detector using CuK α
radiation and operating at 40 kV and 40 mA. In orderto minimize the background, the powdered sample

was placed on the surface of a flat silicon wafer fromacetone suspension. Powder pattern was collected in
the Bragg–Brentano geometry in the range 5–72° 2θ,step 0.01° and counting time of 30 s per step (total
duration of experiment was c. 3 days). Positions andintensities of diffractions were found and refined using the PearsonVII profile-shape function with the
ZDS program package (Ondruš 1993) and the unit-cellparameters were refined by the least-squares algorithm
implemented by Burnham (1962).
Tab. 2 PXRD data of antimonselite from Příbram
h

k

l

dobs.

dcalc.

Iobs.

1

0

1

8.249

8.247

19

Icalc.
6

2

0

0

5.872

5.872

100

14

0

0

2

5.790

5.792

4

4

2

0

1

5.239

5.237

78

41

2

0

2

4.123

4.124

21

6

3

0

1

3.708

3.709

41

18

1

0

3

3.668

3.668

23

12

3

0

2

3.243

3.243

60

45

2

0

3

3.227

3.226

31

12

1

1

2

3.136

3.137

1

71

4

0

0

2.936

2.936

3

1

2

1

2

2.847

2.847

5

100

0

1

3

2.756

2.756

4

62

3

0

3

2.748

2.749

6

3

4

0

2

2.618

2.619

48

48

2

0

4

2.596

2.597

28

15

4

0

3

2.33672.3371

5

4

3

0

4

2.32882.3282

11

7

1

0

5

2.27302.2731

3

3

5

0

2

2.17632.1766

15

12

2

0

5

2.1555

2.1552

12

16

4

0

4

2.06162.0618

10

5

3

0

5

1.99411.9939

20

14

6

0

0

1.95701.9573

8

2

0

0

6

1.93041.9308

5

3

6

0

1

1.9304

1.9299

5

2

1

0

6

1.90581.9052

3

6

6

1

0

1.75311.7525

2

43

6

0

3

1.74551.7458

6

12

4

0

6

1.61301.6132

5

4

2

0

7

1.59301.5929

7

13

7

0

3

1.5391

1.5387

7

6

6

0

5

1.49551.4952

19

6

2

2

5

1.45331.4532

1

9

7

0

4

1.45201.4517

7

4

8

0

2

1.42281.4230

2

2

4

1

7

1.35371.3537

3

17

8

0

4

1.30911.30942

1

25

Pavel Škácha, Jakub Plášil, Jiří Sejkora, Viktor Goliáš

Tab. 3 Refined unit-cell parameters of antimonseliteaPříbram; this paperPříbram; this paper

China, Bentou(powder)(single-crystal)Min et al. (1998)

11.7156(3)11.744(4)11.7437(6)b3.9358(7)3.9514(11)3.955(2)c11.5846(8)11.5645(3)11.588(5)V

535.4(1)535.36(15)538.234.2.	Results
Experimental X-ray powder diffraction pattern of antimonselite from Příbram has peak intensities distinctively
different from theoretical values calculated from thesingle-crystal study results. Intensities of some diffractions are an order of magnitude lower (20–70×) thantheoretical values (Tab. 2). Besides minimal amount ofavailable material, this is probably caused also by thepreferred orientation, produced by the perfect cleavage of the mineral and its needle to fibrous character(Toraya and Marumo 1981). Similar effect was describedrecently e.g. in case of extremely fibrous mimetite from
Jáchymov (Sejkora et al. 2011b) or acicular to fibrousmarrucciite crystals from Gelnica (Sejkora et al. 2011a).
China, Kaiyang
The other published antimonChen et al. (1993)
selite PXRD data (Liu et al.
11.747
1999, 2008) do not show any
3.984
preferred orientation probably
11.593due to predominant granular542.6
shape of the studied crystals.
The unit-cell parameters wererefined from powder diffraction pattern of antimonselite from Příbram as a = 11.7437(6), b = 3.9358(7), c= 11.5846(8) Å, V = 535.4(1) Å3. Our data are in good
agreement with the published ones (Tab. 3).

5. Crystal structure

5.1.	Experimental

A long-prismatic blackish single crystal of antimonselite, with the dimensions 0.29 × 0.03 × 0.02 mm, wasselected under the optical stereomicroscope for collection of the 3-D intensity data. They were aquiredby Oxford Diffraction Gemini
single-crystal diffractometer
Tab. 4 Crystallographic data and refinement parameters for antimonselite
system, equipped with the Atlas CCD area detector, usStructural formula
Sb2(Se2.577S0.423)
ing monochromatized MoK α
Crystal dataradiation from sealed tube,
Space groupPnma
λ = 0.71073 Å, and with a fibrea [Å]11.7156(3)optics Mo-Enhance collimab [Å]3.9514(11)tor. The unit cell was refinedc [Å]
11.5645(3)by a least-squares algorithm535.36(15)V [Å3]of the CrysAlis Pro Package
Z
4(Agilent Technologies 2012)
5.706
Dcalc [g.cm-3]
from 3353 reflections and gave
Data collection
orthorhombic unit cell with a =Temperature
300K
Detector; wavelength
Atlas CCD; MoKα (0.71073 Å)
11.7156(3), b = 3.9514(11), c =Crystal dimensions
0.29 × 0.03 × 0.02 mm
11.5645(3) Å, V = 535.36(15)Collection modeω scans, full sphereÅ3, and Z = 4. In order to obtain
Limiting θ angles
4.94–27.51°
better resolution of overlapping
Limiting Miller indices–15<h<14, –5<k<4, –14<l<14reflections, originating from theNo. of reflections
6406
split crystals of antimonselite,
No. of unique reflections
677
the detector-to-crystal distanceNo. of observed reflections (criterion)
634 [Iobs>3σ(I)]was set up to 120 mm. The ω
Rint, coverage
0.0237, 98.99%
rotational scans (frame width–1
27.54, analytical, 0.103/0.548
Absorption correction (mm ), Tmin/Tmax
of 0.8° and 55 s exposure per
F000
786
frame) were used to collect the2
Refinement by Jana2006 on F
full-sphere data. In total, 6404
Parameters refined, constraints, restraints
31, 0, 18reflections were measured. After
0.0143, 0.0360
R1, wR2 (obs)merging symmetrically equiva0.0166, 0.0369
R1, wR2 (all)lent reflections, 677 unique and
GOF obs/all
1.21/1.20
634 observed reflections, withΔρmin, Δρmax (eÅ–3)–0.50, 0.53
the criterion [Iobs > 3σ(I)], were
Weighting scheme, details
σ, w = 1/(σ2(I) + 0.0004I2)
26

Sulfur-rich antimonselite from Příbram

Tab. 5 Atomic positions, equivalent and harmonic displacement parameters
Occ.*

x

y

z

Ueq

U11

U22

Sb1
0.03043(3) 0.25 0.67259(3) 0.023137(10) 0.02316(18)0.01707(17)Sb2
0.35295(3) 0.25 0.46142(3) 0.02450(11)0.02200(18)0.02175(18)Se1 0.896(4) 0.21386(4) 0.25 0.80574(4) 0.01928(16)0.0211(3)0.0180(3)S10.104(4)Se2 0.879(4) 0.37113(4) 0.25 0.05587(4) 0.01902(16)0.0219(3)0.0171(3)S20.121(4)Se3 0.802(4) 0.05366(4) 0.25 0.12853(5) 0.01905(17)0.0205(3)0.0157(3)S30.198(4)* occupational factors
Se/S atoms constrained to have equal coordinates and atomic displacement parameters

U33

U12

U13

U23

0.02387(19)0.0298(2)0.0187(3)0000.00199(12)0.00451(13)–0.00122(18)0000.0181(3)00.00255(18)00.0210(3)00.0002(2)0atom.1 Crystallographic parameters and data collection details
Sb1–Se1/S1
2.6437(6)∑BV
are listed in Tab. 4. Final atom
Se2/S22.6562(9) (2×)
Sb1
2.791(3)coordinates and displacement
Se2/S2
3.2347(61)Sb2
2.710(3)parameters are given in Tab. 5.
Se3/S3
3.1881(9) (2×)
Se1
2.101(2)The structural formula of the
Sb2–Se1/S1
2.7852(9) (2×)
Se2
2.092(3)crystal studied by single-crystal
Se2/S2
3.4624(8) (2×)
Se32.220(2)
X-ray diffraction obtained from
Se3/S32.9724(9) (2×)
the site-scattering refinement is
Se3/S32.5713(6)Sb2(Se2.577S0.423), which is satisThe bond-strength parameters used in calculations for Sb–Se pair after Brown (2013, pers. comm.)
factorily matching the results ofthe electron-microprobe study. The results of the bondobtained. Data were corrected for background, Lorentz
valence analysis of the structure are listed in Tab. 6, alongeffect and polarization (CrysAlis Pro RED; Agilent Techwith the interatomic distances.
nologies 2012), and a combined correction for absorption
was applied (multi-scan and analytical correction, thelatter after Clark and Reid 1995), leading to an internal
6. Discussion
R-factor of the merged dataset equal to 0.0237.
Tab. 6 Interatomic distances (in Å) and bond-valence sums (in valence units) for the antimonselite structure

5.2. Structure solution and refinement
Crystal structure of antimonselite was solved by the
charge-flipping algorithm implemented in the Superflip
program (Palatinus and Chapuis 2007) and refined by
the full-matrix least-square algorithm of the Jana2006
program (Petříček et al. 2006) based on F2. The spacegroup Pnma was chosen based on the reflection statistics
and this choice was also indicated by the Superflip program output. No cell of the higher symmetry was foundusing LePage and ADDSYMM (Spek 2003, 2009). In theprevious structure determinations (Min et al. 1998), a different space-group setting was used. It was, however, notconsistent with the conventional setting of the isotypic
stibnite, having Pnma. All the 5 atoms in the asymmetricunit were found by the structure solution. The subsequent
refinement including anisotropic displacement parametersof all atoms and refined site-occupancies converged to thefinal residuals R1 = 0.0143 for 634 unique observed andwR2 = 0.0369 for all 677 reflections with a GOFall = 1.20
(Tab. 4). The difference Fourier maps did not reveal any
significant residual electron density; the highest positive
maximum was 0.53 eÅ–3, located 1.00 Å from the Sb1

Antimonselite, stibnite and their intermediate members
are known from several gold and uranium deposits in
China. Based on average electron-microprobe analysesof Sb2Se3–Sb2S3 from the Laerma and Qiongmo localities(China), the formulae of Se-bearing stibnite, selenium
stibnite, sulfur antimonselite and S-bearing antimonselite
can be written as Sb2.03(S2.67Se0.33)3.00, Sb2.00(S2.06Se0.94)3.00,
Sb1.98(Se1.71S1.31)3.00 and Sb1.86(Se2.64S0.36)3.00, respectively(Liu et al. 1999). According to this nomenclature, it
is possible to classify antimonselite from Příbram as
S-bearing antimonselite. Differences between analysesof antimonselite from Příbram and other analyses ofstibnite–antimonselite series, both synthetic and natural(Fig. 3), are caused by lower than ideal ratio of sum ofanions versus sum of cations.
The overall rarity of antimonselite is probably related
to specific mode of origin of this mineral phase. The well
documented minerals of the stibnite–antimonselite series
from the stratabound gold deposits Laerma and Qiongmo
1

The residual density, which is also responsible for the higher goodnessof fit (GOF) may be connected with absorption correction, unresolved
twinning features (the small number of overlapping reflections) orbonding effects.

27Pavel Škácha, Jakub Plášil, Jiří Sejkora, Viktor Goliáš

S-bearing antimonselite from Příbram (this work)
Stibnite–antimonselite series from Laerma and Qiongmo (Liu et al. 1999)
Synthetic stibnite–antimonselite series (Liu et al. 2008)

were supposed to have crystallized at 150–210 °C(Liu et al. 1999). The U mineralization in Příbram ischaracterized by temperatures between 200 and 80 °C,
but the deposition of uranium minerals, which are in
direct association with younger selenides mineralization, preceded at temperatures between 130–80 °C (Žákand Dobeš 1991). The extensive group of selenides ofmany elements like Pb, Sb, Ag, Hg, Cu and Tl found inmany types of gangue material of the Příbram uranium
and base-metal deposit indicates variable conditionsof origin. This is supported by the joint occurrence ofselenide–sulfide pairs at the uraninite stage (e.g. hakite–tetrahedrite, chalcopyrite–eskebornite, tiemannite–cinnabar, antimonselite–stibnite and others), which were also
described on the original Chinese localities. The mostinteresting Se minerals in studied Příbram specimens,
including antimonselite, were found in the youngest
parts of the uranium–carbonate stage. These parts wereformed by hydrothermal alteration of the older gangue
filling, accompanied by the origin of younger uraninite,
antimonselite and other sulfides and selenides. The
observed association in the specimen “B”: tiemannite–hakite–tetrahedrite–antimonselite, shows the decreasing
activity of Se in hydrothermal solutions accompanied by
the crystallization of Hg or Cu–Hg selenides and terminated by the crystallization of Se-poor tetrahedrite. The
presence of the youngest antimonselite in this association
is a clear evidence for infiltration of rejuvenated solutions with high selenium activity.
28

Fig. 3 Plot of Se and S contents (apfu)
of natural stibnite–antimonselite series
from Příbram (this work), Laerma andQiongmo in China (Liu et al. 1999) andsynthetic stibnite–antimonselite series(Liu et al. 2008).

Acknowledgements. An anonymous reviewer andFrantišek Veselovský, as well as handling editor Roman
Skála and editor in chief Vojtěch Janoušek, are highly
acknowledged for the comments and suggestions greatly
improving the manuscript. We thank Karla Fejfarová forassistance with the collection of the X-ray data. The grantPremium Academiae of ASCR is acknowledged for thefinancial support of JP and the project GA14-27006S of
the Czech Science Foundation for JS.

References
Agilent Technologies (2012) CrysAlis CCD and CrysAlis
RED. Oxford Diffraction Ltd, Yarnton, Oxfordshire, UK
Burnham CW (1962) Lattice constant refinement. Carnegie
Institute Washington Yearbook 61: 132–135
Chen L, Zhang Q, Li D, Wang G (1993) Antimonselite, a
new mineral. Acta Miner Sinica 13: 7–11 (in Chinese)
Clark RC, Reid JS (1995) The analytical calculation of absorption in multifaceted crystals. Acta Cryst A51: 887–897
Dymkov JM (1985) Selenides of uraninite–carbonate veins.
In: Paragenesis of the Minerals of the Uranium-Bearing
Veins. Nedra, Moscow, pp 153–162 (in Russian)
Ettler V, Sejkora J, Drahota P, Litochleb J, Pauliš P,
Zeman J, Novák M, Pašava J (2010) Příbram and Kutná
Hora mining districts – from historical mining to recent
environmental impact. In: IMA 2010, Budapest. Acta
Miner-Petrol, Field Guide Series 7: 1–23

Sulfur-rich antimonselite from Příbram

Litochleb J, Sejkora J, Šrein V (2004) Selenide minerals
from the Bytíz deposit (Příbram uranium–base-metal ore
district). Bull miner-petrolog Odd Nár Muz (Praha) 12:
113–123 (in Czech)
Liu J, Liu J, Lu W, Zheng M, Zhou Y, Gu X, Zhang B (1998)
Se-stibnite from Qiongmo gold deposit in Western Qinling, China. Acta Miner Sinica 18: 445–451(in Chinese)
Liu J, Liu J, Liu C, Lu W, Liu S, Su W (1999) Mineralogyof the stibnite–antimonselite series. Int Geol Rev 41:
1042–1050
Liu J, Liu J, Li J, Xie H, Wang J, Deng J, Feng C, Qi F, Zhang
N (2008) Experimental synthesis of the stibnite–antimonselite solid solution series. Int Geol Rev 50: 163–176
Min M, Wu J (1992) Stable isotopes studies of paleokarsthosted uranium deposits in China. Geoch J 32: 103–115
Min M, Li D, Shi N, Liu Q, Cao Y (1995) Some new dataon antimonselite. Acta Miner Sinica 15: 303–304
Min M, Zhai J, Wang X, Shen B, Wen G, Fan T (1998)
Refinement of the crystal structure for a new mineral –antimonselite. Chinese Sci Bull 43: 413–416
Ondruš P (1993) A computer program for analysis of
X-ray powder diffraction patterns. Materials Sci Forum,
EPDIC-2, Enchede, 133-136: 297-300.
Palatinus L, Chapuis G (2007) Superflip – a computer
program for the solution of crystal structures by charge
flipping in arbitrary dimensions. J Appl Crystallogr 40:
451–456
Petříček V, Dušek M, Palatinus L (2006) Jana2006. The
crystallographic computing system. Institute of Physics,
Prague, Czech Republic (http://jana.fzu.cz)
Pouchou JL, Pichoir F (1985) “PAP” (φ ρZ) procedure for
improved quantitative microanalysis. In: Armstrong
JT (ed) Microbeam Analysis. San Francisco Press, San
Francisco, pp 104–106
Růžička J (1986) Minerals of the Příbram Uranium Deposit.
Komitét sympozia Hornická Příbram ve vědě a technice.
Příbram, pp 1–244 (in Czech)
Sejkora J, Ozdín D, Laufek F, Plášil J, Litochleb J (2011a)
Marrucciite, a rare Hg sulfosalt from the Gelnica ore
deposit (Slovak Republic), and its comparison withthe type occurrence at Bucca della Vena mine (Italy).
J Geosci 56: 399–408
Sejkora J, Plášil J, Císařová I, Škoda R, Hloušek J,
Veselovský F, Jebavá I (2011b) Interesting supergene
Pb-rich mineral association from the Rovnost mining
field, Jáchymov (St. Joachimsthal), Czech Republic.
J Geosci 56: 257–271
Spek AL (2003) Single-crystal structure validation with theprogram PLATON. J Appl Cryst 36: 7–13
Spek AL (2009) Structure validation in chemical crystallography. Acta Cryst D65: 148–155
Škácha P, Sejkora J (2007) The occurrence of arsenolamprite at the Příbram uranium–polymetallic district (Czech
Republic). Bull mineral-petrolog Odd Nár Muz (Praha)
14–15: 131–133 (in Czech with English abstract)Škácha P, Sejkora J, Litochleb J, Hofman P (2009) The
occurrence of cuprostibite in the Příbram uranium–basemetals ore district (the shaft 16, Příbram–Háje), Czech
Republic. Bull miner-petrolog Odd Nár Muz (Praha) 17:
73–78 (in Czech with English abstract)Škácha P, Vlček V, Sejkora J, Plášil J, Goliáš V (2010)
Compositional trends in hakite, possible discrepancies from
ideal structure. Acta Miner-Petrol, Abstract Series 6: 725
Škácha P, Buixaderas E, Plášil J, Sejkora J, Goliáš V,
Vlček V (2014) Permingeatite, Cu3SbSe4, from Příbram
(Czech Republic): description and Raman spectroscopy
investigations of the luzonite-group of minerals. CanadMineral 52: 501–511
Toraya H, Marumo F (1981) Preferred orientation correction in powder pattern fitting. Mineral J 10: 211–221Tvrdý J (2003) Geology and ore veins of the Příbram district. Lapis 7/8: 23–26 (in German)
Wen H, Carignan J, Qiu Y, Liu S (2006) Selenium speciation in Kerogen from two Chinese selenium deposits:
environmental implications. Environ Sci Technol 40:
1126–132
Žák K, Dobeš P (1991) Stable isotopes and fluid inclusions
in hydrothermal deposits: the Příbram ore region. Rozpr
Čs Akad Věd, Ř mat přír Věd, Academia, Prague, pp
1–109

29